Prevalence of bullying and violence among adolescents in Arab Gulf countries: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aim This systematic review examined the prevalence, characteristics, risk factors, and consequences of bullying and violence among adolescents in Arab Gulf countries (AGC). Subject and methods We conducted a comprehensive search across PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases from inception to April 2025. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Results A total of 16 cross-sectional studies from six Gulf countries were included. Findings revealed substantial bullying prevalence ranging from 12.6% to 83.28%, with verbal bullying (up to 89.4%) emerging as the predominant form, followed by physical (10.6-17.0%) and social bullying (approximately 6.0%). Educational settings constituted primary contexts for incidents, with specific high-risk locations identified, including corridors (54.8%), restrooms (17.5%), and classrooms (up to 80% in private schools). Gender-specific patterns were observed, with some studies reporting higher physical aggression among boys and others documenting increased psychological abuse and cyberbullying among girls. Mental health consequences were consistently significant, with bullied students demonstrating substantially increased risks of depression (OR 2.66) and anxiety (OR 2.89). Academic impacts included increased absenteeism (24–29%) and decreased performance. Conclusion This review highlights the widespread prevalence and serious consequences of bullying among adolescents in AGC, with clear gender differences and significant impacts on mental health and academic performance. The findings underscore the urgent need for tailored assessment approaches, gender-responsive interventions, integrated school-based mental health services, and culturally focused prevention strategies that address both traditional and cyberbullying in the rapidly evolving sociocultural context of the AGC.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".